Meeting the common law partner requirements

[ELD1234]

Hi everyone,

I would like to have some feedbacks on if you think that my girlfriend and I are meeting the requirements for a common law partner sponsorship.

Here is our situation:

I'm a canadian citizen and she is Colombian.
We are living together in Bogotá, Colombia since february 2020. We are not renting our own appartement, but instead, we are renting a room in a shared appartment (where we recently moved, before, we were renting a room in a shared house). We did not sign any contract, for both rooms.
She is currently working. I'm not (I'm currently living on some savings from my previous job).
We don't have a joint bank account, but we do share expenses (rent, food, activies, etc.).

We are planing to wait until february 2021 to submit the application (we will have lived together for a year by then), then I would come back to Canada a while to work, and would come back to Colombia until my girlfriend could come to Canada.

Do you think that our relation would be considered a common law partner relationship? Or would the absence of a rent contract, or the fact that I'm not working would be a problem? Also, I'm thinking about going to Canada for a period of 2 weeks in december to see my family, and come back to Colombia after. Would it affect the status of our relationship?

Any feedback would be appreciated!
Thank you

 

[thevisawhisperer]

Starting with the easy part - the 2 week holiday in Canada won't affect your status.
As for the rest - not quite so easy.
A rent contract is not an absolute requirement to apply for a common-law sponsorship.
IRCC evaluates relationships on 2 elements:
The first is the co-habitation requirement that the couple have been living in a marriage-like relationship for at least 12 consecutive months (except for an exception in law for 2 week holidays in Canada). This can be demonstrated partially with a rental agreement or lease, but the Document Checklist presents a number of other alternative documents.
The second is the genuineness element. IRCC takes a traditional view of marriage-like relationships in that one way to judge genuineness is the extent to which your family, social circle, and society in general recognise and accept you as a couple. That is why the photo montage should not be exclusively selfies of the 2 of you in various spots, but should include as many other friends and family as possible.
Another way they judge genuineness is with a practical (legal, financial) entwining of your lives - mutual financial support, beneficiary on insurance documents etc.
Again, the document checklist gives a number of alternative documents to demonstrate that. The low-hanging fruit on the list is letters from family and friends gushing about your relationship. And then one more.

 

[armoured]

Hi everyone,

I would like to have some feedbacks on if you think that my girlfriend and I are meeting the requirements for a common law partner sponsorship.

Here is our situation:

I'm a canadian citizen and she is Colombian.
We are living together in Bogotá, Colombia since february 2020. We are not renting our own appartement, but instead, we are renting a room in a shared appartment (where we recently moved, before, we were renting a room in a shared house). We did not sign any contract, for both rooms.
She is currently working. I'm not (I'm currently living on some savings from my previous job).
We don't have a joint bank account, but we do share expenses (rent, food, activies, etc.).

We are planing to wait until february 2021 to submit the application (we will have lived together for a year by then), then I would come back to Canada a while to work, and would come back to Colombia until my girlfriend could come to Canada.

Do you think that our relation would be considered a common law partner relationship? Or would the absence of a rent contract, or the fact that I'm not working would be a problem?

Personal view only: I expect that they will look at your file with a very skeptical eye.

You can meet the technical requirement of living together and being in a romantic relationship and still get rejected.

Look at it from an outsider's point of view: shared accommodation with others, two different places, no rental agreement, no obvious mingling of assets (presumably apart from whatever fits in your room and perhaps kitchen gear). You seem to be residing in Colombia only temporarily - which again, will make it seem as not really a "complete and joint household." (Not working in Colombia is not in itself an issue - except that if anything reinforces that it looks to be a temporary arrangement for you)

And the time living together barely meets the 12 month requirement - which should be seen as a minimum.

You say nothing about how long or what type of relationship it was before you started living together; that may or may not help your case in evaluation of whether it is a true long-term relationship so won't speculate. If you've been seeing each other for e.g. several years before with frequent physical meetings and time together, might help.

Honestly, want to improve your chances without significantly changing your plans and arrangements? Get married. Even that on its own won't be enough to be convincing, but it is the most likely to improve your chances.

Right now a strong possibility they will see you moving together (temporarily) to shared accommodation as an attempt to meet the minimum qualification of living together for 12 months.

 

[thevisawhisperer]

The truth will set you free. If the relationship is legit, it's up to you to demonstrate it. Bury them with evidence.

 

[ELD1234]

Starting with the easy part - the 2 week holiday in Canada won't affect your status.
As for the rest - not quite so easy.
A rent contract is not an absolute requirement to apply for a common-law sponsorship.
IRCC evaluates relationships on 2 elements:
The first is the co-habitation requirement that the couple have been living in a marriage-like relationship for at least 12 consecutive months (except for an exception in law for 2 week holidays in Canada). This can be demonstrated partially with a rental agreement or lease, but the Document Checklist presents a number of other alternative documents.
The second is the genuineness element. IRCC takes a traditional view of marriage-like relationships in that one way to judge genuineness is the extent to which your family, social circle, and society in general recognise and accept you as a couple. That is why the photo montage should not be exclusively selfies of the 2 of you in various spots, but should include as many other friends and family as possible.
Another way they judge genuineness is with a practical (legal, financial) entwining of your lives - mutual financial support, beneficiary on insurance documents etc.
Again, the document checklist gives a number of alternative documents to demonstrate that. The low-hanging fruit on the list is letters from family and friends gushing about your relationship. And then one more.

Thank you for your answer!
Well as for the genuineness of our relationship, our friends and family are well aware of our relationship! I met her family and friends, but she did not meet mine since she can't come to Canada. As for the legal financial aspect, we don't have any financial attachment apart from our collocation. But couldn't the fact that we are relatively young (we both are 25yo) help us explain why it's like that?

 

[ELD1234]

Personal view only: I expect that they will look at your file with a very skeptical eye.

You can meet the technical requirement of living together and being in a romantic relationship and still get rejected.

Look at it from an outsider's point of view: shared accommodation with others, two different places, no rental agreement, no obvious mingling of assets (presumably apart from whatever fits in your room and perhaps kitchen gear). You seem to be residing in Colombia only temporarily - which again, will make it seem as not really a "complete and joint household." (Not working in Colombia is not in itself an issue - except that if anything reinforces that it looks to be a temporary arrangement for you)

And the time living together barely meets the 12 month requirement - which should be seen as a minimum.

You say nothing about how long or what type of relationship it was before you started living together; that may or may not help your case in evaluation of whether it is a true long-term relationship so won't speculate. If you've been seeing each other for e.g. several years before with frequent physical meetings and time together, might help.

Honestly, want to improve your chances without significantly changing your plans and arrangements? Get married. Even that on its own won't be enough to be convincing, but it is the most likely to improve your chances.

Right now a strong possibility they will see you moving together (temporarily) to shared accommodation as an attempt to meet the minimum qualification of living together for 12 months.

Thanks for your answer!
I am only temporarily living in Colombia, and our goal would be to live in Canada, and are together since 2 years (the first year, we saw each other for about 6 months). But, if I understand well your point, the fact that I'm here temporarily, and that we want to move to Canada together would be seen badly ? It was my understanding, that this would not affect the genuineness of the relationship. I tought that being Canadian, and wanting to live with my "genuiness commonlaw partner" in my country would be enough. Is there some other criteria that they are looking at?

Thanks you!

 

[thevisawhisperer]

Thank you for your answer!
Well as for the genuineness of our relationship, our friends and family are well aware of our relationship! I met her family and friends, but she did not meet mine since she can't come to Canada. As for the legal financial aspect, we don't have any financial attachment apart from our collocation. But couldn't the fact that we are relatively young (we both are 25yo) help us explain why it's like that?

My premise was that you should overwhelm them with corroborating evidence. As soon as you slip in to 'help us explain' then you've allowed the balance to tip to subjectivity and you are lost.

 

[armoured]

I am only temporarily living in Colombia, and our goal would be to live in Canada, and are together since 2 years (the first year, we saw each other for about 6 months). But, if I understand well your point, the fact that I'm here temporarily, and that we want to move to Canada together would be seen badly ? It was my understanding, that this would not affect the genuineness of the relationship. I tought that being Canadian, and wanting to live with my "genuiness commonlaw partner" in my country would be enough. Is there some other criteria that they are looking at?

I think there are really two parts you're missing.

1) I believe they will look at the temporary aspect of you residing there as distinct from the concept of establishing a joint household, which implies some form of permanence, not ticking the boxes to meet the minimum. Frankly it almost looks like you're living in student housing together (the shared aspect reinforces this). (And if it's permanent why aren't you just getting married? You say girlfriend - commonlaw means spouse). The relationship can be genuine and meet technical minimum of commonlaw without being fully convincing as a genuine, permanent, commonlaw relationship wth all that entails like a well-established joint household.

2) The other main part you're missing is skepticism on the part of reviewing officers - that some such applications are more about getting the applicant PR status in Canada rather than a long term permanent spousal relationship. That's why I referred to looking at it from a skeptical eye rather than starting from the assumption of genuineness (which of course seems self-evident to you).

I may be wrong, again, don't know all the other aspects of your situation and relationship. Perhaps the evidence you provide will be convincing. But based only on what you've stated, I think there's a relatively high risk they will look at your file with skepticism. As other poster stated, if there's subjective room in there to doubt, that is not in your favour.

 

[ELD1234]

I think there are really two parts you're missing.

1) I believe they will look at the temporary aspect of you residing there as distinct from the concept of establishing a joint household, which implies some form of permanence, not ticking the boxes to meet the minimum. Frankly it almost looks like you're living in student housing together (the shared aspect reinforces this). (And if it's permanent why aren't you just getting married? You say girlfriend - commonlaw means spouse). The relationship can be genuine and meet technical minimum of commonlaw without being fully convincing as a genuine, permanent, commonlaw relationship wth all that entails like a well-established joint household.

2) The other main part you're missing is skepticism on the part of reviewing officers - that some such applications are more about getting the applicant PR status in Canada rather than a long term permanent spousal relationship. That's why I referred to looking at it from a skeptical eye rather than starting from the assumption of genuineness (which of course seems self-evident to you).

I may be wrong, again, don't know all the other aspects of your situation and relationship. Perhaps the evidence you provide will be convincing. But based only on what you've stated, I think there's a relatively high risk they will look at your file with skepticism. As other poster stated, if there's subjective room in there to doubt, that is not in your favour.

I get your point now, thanks for the clarifications!